Letter Sequence RAI |
---|
|
|
MONTHYEARML0515203212005-06-0202 June 2005 6/2/05, Palisades - RAI Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors Project stage: RAI ML0514701542005-06-0909 June 2005 RAI, Generic Letter 2004-02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Sump Recirculation at Pressurized-Water Reactors Project stage: RAI ML0603705332006-02-0909 February 2006 RAI - Response to Generic Letter 2004-02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design-Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors Project stage: RAI ML0733711692007-12-0303 December 2007 Palisades, Request for Extension of Completion Date for Corrective Actions Required by Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: Request ML0816906122008-06-17017 June 2008 Palisades, Request for Extension of Completion Data for Corrective Actions Required by Generic Letter 2004-02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors. Project stage: Request ML0817104782008-06-19019 June 2008 Clarification of the 6/17/08 Letter to the NRC on Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: Other ML0817807862008-06-27027 June 2008 Extension of Implementation of Generic Letter 2004-02 Actions Project stage: Other ML0834506892008-12-24024 December 2008 Request for Additional Information, Supplemental Response to GL 2004-02 Project stage: RAI ML0907908442009-03-20020 March 2009 Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Supplemental Responses to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: Response to RAI ML0910706642009-05-13013 May 2009 Report on Results of Staff Audit of Chemical Effects Related Actions to Address Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: Other ML0918202752009-06-30030 June 2009 Palisades, Follow-up Supplemental Response to NRC Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: Supplement ML1006106542010-03-0808 March 2010 Request for Additional Information Regarding Actions to Address Generic Letter 2004-02 Project stage: RAI ML1011604932010-04-27027 April 2010 05/12-13/2010 Notice of Meeting with Energy Nuclear Operations LLC (ENO) Regarding Response to Generic Letter 2004-02 for Palisades Nuclear Plant Project stage: Meeting ML1013002252010-05-0707 May 2010 Draft Responses to NRC RAI in Preparation for Meeting on May 12 and 13, 2010 - GL 2004-02 Project stage: Request ML1015905272010-06-11011 June 2010 05/12-13/2010-Summary of Meeting with Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Regarding Response to Request for Additional Information for Generic Letter 2004-02 for Palisades Nuclear Plant Project stage: RAI 2008-06-27
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:Letter
MONTHYEARML24022A1172024-01-23023 January 2024 Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Amendment Request to Revise Renewed Facility Operating License and Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications to Support Resumption of Power Operations ML24012A2422024-01-16016 January 2024 Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action License Transfer Request ML23236A0042023-12-27027 December 2023 Issuance of Amendment 274 Re Changes to Perm Defueled Emergency Plan and Perm Defueled Emergency Action Level Scheme ML23355A1242023-12-26026 December 2023 Withdrawal of an Amendment Request Re License Amendment Request to Revise License Condition to Eliminate Cyber Security Plan Requirements ML23192A0772023-12-26026 December 2023 Letter Exemption from the Requirements of 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) Concerning Offsite Primary and Secondary Liability Insurance ML23191A5222023-12-22022 December 2023 Exemption Letter from the Requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(W)(1) Concerning Onsite Property Damage Insurance (EPID - L-2022-LLE-0032) ML23263A9772023-12-22022 December 2023 Exemption from Certain Emergency Planning Requirements and Related Safety Evaluation ML23354A2602023-12-21021 December 2023 Reference Simulator Inspection Request for Information L-23-019, Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.152023-12-18018 December 2023 Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.15 PNP 2023-030, License Amendment Request to Revise Renewed Facility Operating License and Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications to Support Resumption of Power Operations2023-12-14014 December 2023 License Amendment Request to Revise Renewed Facility Operating License and Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications to Support Resumption of Power Operations PNP 2023-035, Withdrawal of License Amendment Request - Revise License Condition to Eliminate Cyber Security Plan Requirements2023-12-12012 December 2023 Withdrawal of License Amendment Request - Revise License Condition to Eliminate Cyber Security Plan Requirements PNP 2023-028, Application for Order Consenting to Transfer of Control of License and Approving Conforming License Amendments2023-12-0606 December 2023 Application for Order Consenting to Transfer of Control of License and Approving Conforming License Amendments L-23-012, Master Decommissioning Trust Agreement Changes for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2 and 3, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Palisades Nuclear Plant and the Non-Qualified Trust for Big Rock Point2023-11-13013 November 2023 Master Decommissioning Trust Agreement Changes for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2 and 3, Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Palisades Nuclear Plant and the Non-Qualified Trust for Big Rock Point ML23291A4402023-11-0303 November 2023 Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2) to Support Reauthorization of Power Operations IR 05000255/20230032023-10-0404 October 2023 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000255/2023003(DRSS)-Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, Palisades Nuclear Plant ML23275A0012023-10-0202 October 2023 Request for Withholding Information from Public Disclosure for Palisades Nuclear Plant PNP 2023-025, Request for Exemption from Certain Termination of License Requirements of 10 CFR 50.822023-09-28028 September 2023 Request for Exemption from Certain Termination of License Requirements of 10 CFR 50.82 PNP 2023-026, Pre-Submittal Meeting Presentation - Palisades Nuclear Plant License Transfer Application to Support Resumption of Power Operations2023-09-28028 September 2023 Pre-Submittal Meeting Presentation - Palisades Nuclear Plant License Transfer Application to Support Resumption of Power Operations PNP 2023-023, Special Report High Range Noble Gas Monitor Inoperable2023-08-0909 August 2023 Special Report High Range Noble Gas Monitor Inoperable ML23215A2302023-08-0303 August 2023 Notice of Organization Change - Chief Nuclear Officer IR 05000255/20230022023-07-19019 July 2023 NRC Inspection Report 05000255/2023002 DRSS-Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, Palisades Nuclear Plant ML23087A0362023-05-0202 May 2023 PSDAR Review Letter ML23117A2172023-05-0101 May 2023 Safety Evaluation for Quality Assurance Program Manual Reduction in Commitment PNP 2023-018, 2022 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report2023-04-25025 April 2023 2022 Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report L-23-004, HDI Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Reports - 20222023-04-24024 April 2023 HDI Annual Occupational Radiation Exposure Data Reports - 2022 PNP 2023-007, and Big Rock Point, 2022 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Waste Disposal Reports2023-04-19019 April 2023 and Big Rock Point, 2022 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Waste Disposal Reports PNP 2023-008, 2022 Radiological Environmental Operating Report2023-04-18018 April 2023 2022 Radiological Environmental Operating Report L-23-003, Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations2023-03-31031 March 2023 Report on Status of Decommissioning Funding for Reactors and Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations PNP 2023-002, 6 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report2023-03-31031 March 2023 6 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report ML23088A0382023-03-29029 March 2023 Stations 1, 2, & 3, Palisades Nuclear Plant, and Big Rock Point - Nuclear Onsite Property Damage Insurance PNP 2023-006, Report of Changes to Security Plan, Revision 202023-03-29029 March 2023 Report of Changes to Security Plan, Revision 20 PNP 2023-012, Presentation on Regulatory Path to Reauthorize Power Operations2023-03-16016 March 2023 Presentation on Regulatory Path to Reauthorize Power Operations ML23038A0982023-03-15015 March 2023 Request for Withholding Information from Public Disclosure ML23095A0642023-03-14014 March 2023 American Nuclear Insurers, Notice of Cancellation Rescinded PNP 2023-001, Regulatory Path to Reauthorize Power Operations2023-03-13013 March 2023 Regulatory Path to Reauthorize Power Operations PNP 2023-004, Report of Changes to Palisades Nuclear Plant Technical Specification Bases2023-03-0808 March 2023 Report of Changes to Palisades Nuclear Plant Technical Specification Bases PNP 2023-005, Response to Palisades Nuclear Plant - Request for Additional Information Related to the Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report2023-03-0101 March 2023 Response to Palisades Nuclear Plant - Request for Additional Information Related to the Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report ML22361A1022023-02-24024 February 2023 Reactor Decommissioning Branch Project Management Changes for Some Decommissioning Facilities and Establishment of Backup Project Manager for All Decommissioning Facilities ML23052A1092023-02-17017 February 2023 FEMA Letter to NRC, Proposed Commission Paper Language for Palisades Nuclear Plant Emergency Plan Decommissioning Exemption Request ML23032A3992023-02-0101 February 2023 Regulatory Path to Reauthorize Power Operations IR 05000255/20220032022-12-28028 December 2022 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000255/2022003(DRSS); 07200007/2022001 (Drss) Holtec Decommissioning International, LLC, Palisades Nuclear Plant L-22-042, Oyster, Pilgrim, Indian Point, Palisades and Big Rock Point - Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.152022-12-14014 December 2022 Oyster, Pilgrim, Indian Point, Palisades and Big Rock Point - Proof of Financial Protection 10 CFR 140.15 PNP 2022-037, Report of Changes to Security Plan, Revision 192022-12-14014 December 2022 Report of Changes to Security Plan, Revision 19 ML22321A2852022-11-17017 November 2022 LLC Master Decommissioning Trust Agreement for Palisades Nuclear Plant IR 05000255/20224012022-11-0909 November 2022 Decommissioning Palisades Nuclear Plant - Decommissioning Security Inspection Report 05000255/2022401 PNP 2022-036, Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request for Proposed Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan and Permanently Defueled Emergency Action Level Scheme2022-11-0808 November 2022 Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request for Proposed Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan and Permanently Defueled Emergency Action Level Scheme PNP 2022-035, International - Notification of Commitment Cancellations for Remaining Activities Related to Beyond-Design-Basis Seismic Hazard Reevaluations2022-11-0202 November 2022 International - Notification of Commitment Cancellations for Remaining Activities Related to Beyond-Design-Basis Seismic Hazard Reevaluations PNP 2022-024, Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) Concerning Primary and Secondary Liability Insurance2022-10-26026 October 2022 Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 140.11(a)(4) Concerning Primary and Secondary Liability Insurance PNP 2022-026, Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) Concerning Onsite Property Damage Insurance2022-10-26026 October 2022 Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 50.54(w)(1) Concerning Onsite Property Damage Insurance ML22292A2572022-10-25025 October 2022 Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan License Amendment RAI Letter 2024-01-23
[Table view] Category:Request for Additional Information (RAI)
MONTHYEARML23354A2602023-12-21021 December 2023 Reference Simulator Inspection Request for Information ML23055A1542023-02-24024 February 2023 Attachment: Request for Additional Information on the Palisades PSDAR ML22292A2582022-10-31031 October 2022 PDEP-EAL Amendment RAI ML22102A2482022-04-14014 April 2022 Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request for Permanently Defueled Technical Specifications ML21274A4172021-10-0505 October 2021 Request for Information for an NRC Triennial Heat Exchanger/Sink Performance Inspection and Request for Information Inspection Report 05000255/2021004 ML21028A4092021-01-27027 January 2021 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - Acceptance of Holtec Exemption Request from 10CFR50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) and 10CFR50.75(h)(1)(iv) ML21028A0552021-01-27027 January 2021 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - Acceptance of License Transfer Application ML20272A0112020-09-26026 September 2020 Request for Additional Information - Palisades Relief Request RR 5-8 (Proposed Alternative) for Reactor Pressure Vessel Head Penetration Repairs ML20133K0562020-05-14014 May 2020 Information Request to Support the NRC Annual Baseline Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes Inspection ML19357A2752019-12-23023 December 2019 Request for Information for an NRC Triennial Baseline Design Bases Assurance Inspection (Team); Inspection Report 05000255/2020011 ML19226A2932019-08-14014 August 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information Re License Amendment Request to Adopt TSTF-425, Revision 3 for the Palisades Nuclear Plant ML19226A2922019-08-0505 August 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Draft Request for Additional Information for Palisades License Amendment Request to Adopt TSTF-425 ML19122A4852019-04-29029 April 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information for Palisades License Amendment Request to Revise License Conditions Related to NFPA 805 Modifications ML19009A5392019-01-0909 January 2019 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information for Palisades License Amendment Request to Revise Emergency Diesel Generator Degraded Voltage Surveillance Requirement 3.3.5.2a ML19009A5382018-12-12012 December 2018 NRR E-mail Capture - Draft Request for Additional Information for Palisades License Amendment Request to Revise Emergency Diesel Generator Degraded Voltage Surveillance Requirement 3.3.5.2a ML18337A1382018-11-30030 November 2018 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information Related to Palisades Relief Request Number RR 5-7 ML18337A1402018-11-29029 November 2018 NRR E-mail Capture - Draft Request for Additional Information Related to Palisades Relief Request 5-7 ML18309A1342018-11-0808 November 2018 Supplemental Information Needed for Acceptance or Requested Licensing Action Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt TSTF-425, Revision 3 ML18094B0922018-04-0505 April 2018 Enclosurequest for Additional Information (Letter to B. S. Ford RAI Regarding Entergy Operations, Inc.'S Decommissioning Funding Plan Update for ISFSI Docket Nos.: 72-43, 72-51, 72-1044, 72-07, 72-12, and 72-59) ML18081A2962018-03-22022 March 2018 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - Request for Additional Information Regarding Proposed Changes to Site Emergency Plan for Permanently Defueled Condition (CAC MG0198: EPID L-2017-LLA-0305) ML18059A8202018-02-28028 February 2018 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - Request for Additional Information Regarding Proposed Alternative for Relevant Condition ML17335A1042017-11-30030 November 2017 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - RAI Regarding Proposed Changes to Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specifications for Permanently Defueled Condition (CAC MG0021; EPID L-2017-LLA-0266) ML17118A3342017-04-18018 April 2017 E-Mailed Request for Information Dated 04/18/2017 for Palisades Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Inservice Inspection - Part B Items (Exf) ML17118A3312017-04-18018 April 2017 E-Mailed Request for Information Dated 04/18/17 for Palisades Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Inservice Inspection - Part a Items ML17072A2752017-03-10010 March 2017 NRR E-mail Capture - Palisades Nuclear Plant - Final Request for Additional Information Regarding Relief Request No. RR 4-25 ML16238A0302016-08-29029 August 2016 Supplemental Information Needed for Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Control Rod Drive Exercise Surveillance ML16130A0762016-05-11011 May 2016 Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Amendment Request for Implementation of an Alternative Repair Criterion on the Steam Generator Tubes ML16013A0642016-01-13013 January 2016 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information Entergy CNRO-2015-00023 - Revision to Entergy Quality Assurance Program Manual (Fleet Submittal CAC Nos. MF7086-MF7097) ML15341A1662015-12-0707 December 2015 NRR E-mail Capture - Entergy Fleet RR-EN-15-1, Request for Additional Information (CACs MF6341-MF6349) ML15258A2432015-09-0101 September 2015 NRC Supplement to NRC Letter - Notification of NRC Inspection and Request for Information Dated May 1, 2015 - Palisades Nuclear Plant ML15149A2462015-05-28028 May 2015 Information Request to Support NRC Annual Baseline Emergency Action Level and Emergency Plan Changes Inspection (Mxg) ML15072A2542015-03-19019 March 2015 Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Amendment Request to Implement 10 CFR 50.61a CNRO-2015-00008, Responses to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Change in Corporate Form of Entergy Nuclear Holding Company2015-02-18018 February 2015 Responses to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Change in Corporate Form of Entergy Nuclear Holding Company ML15022A1382015-01-22022 January 2015 E-Mail - Palisades Request for Information ML15016A1842015-01-20020 January 2015 Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Amendment Request to Implement 10 CFR 50.61a ML15012A3052015-01-15015 January 2015 Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Amendment Request for an Equivalent Margin Analysis Completed in Accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix G ML14318A4002014-12-17017 December 2014 Vermont Yankee Nuclear and Big Rock Point - Request for Additional Information Regarding Change in Corporate Form of Entergy Nuclear Holding Company (Tac Nos. MF3218 - MF3221) ML14157A3642014-06-0505 June 2014 CDBI Request for Information ML13353A0422013-12-16016 December 2013 NRR E-mail Capture - Request for Additional Information - Palisades - Proposed Revision to Palisades Site Emergency Plan (SEP) Emergency Response Organization (ERO) MF2321 ML13312A4232013-11-26026 November 2013 Interim Staff Evaluation and Request for Additional Information Regarding the Overall Integrated Plan for Implementation of Order EA-12-051, Reliable Spent Fuel Pool Instrumentation ML13179A4622013-07-0505 July 2013 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Decommissioning Funding Status Report Request for Additional Information Regarding the Decommissioning Funding Status Report ML13051A7772013-02-19019 February 2013 Request for Additional Information, 2012 SG Inspection Report ML12314A4222012-11-0808 November 2012 ME8074 - Request for Additional Information Regarding Replacement of Spent Fuel Pool Region I Storage Racks ML12278A3862012-10-0404 October 2012 ANO 1 & 2, Big Rock, FitzPatrick, GGNS, Indian Point 1, 2, and 3, Palisades, Pilgrim, RBS, Vermont Yankee, and Waterford, Request for Additional Information, Round 2, Amendment Request to Revise QA Program Manual and Staff Qualification TSs ML12206A4042012-07-24024 July 2012 Request for Additional Information (Revised) - Palisades - SFP Rerack LAR - ME8074 ML12206A3322012-07-19019 July 2012 E-mail Combined Request for Additional Information for Several Branches of NRR for the Submittal on Palisades re-sack LAR ML12121A7032012-04-27027 April 2012 Relief Request - Proposed Alternative - Use of Alternate ASME Code Case N-770-1 Baseline Examination - ME8492 ML1209604492012-04-0505 April 2012 ANO 1 & 2, Big Rock, FitzPatrick, GGNS, Indian Point 1, 2 & 3, Palisades, Pilgrim, RBS, Vermont Yankee, and Waterford - Request for Additional Information, Revise Quality Assurance Program Manual and Staff Qualification Technical Specificat ML12068A3882012-04-0202 April 2012 Request for Additional Information Regarding License Renewal Commitment to Submit Alloy 600 Program ML12056A0492012-03-12012 March 2012 Enclosure 3 - Recommendation 2.3: Seismic 2023-02-24
[Table view] |
Text
February 9, 2006 Mr. Paul A. Harden Site Vice President Nuclear Management Company, LLC Palisades Nuclear Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043-9530
SUBJECT:
PALISADES PLANT - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE:
RESPONSE TO GENERIC LETTER 2004-02, POTENTIAL IMPACT OF DEBRIS BLOCKAGE ON EMERGENCY RECIRCULATION DURING DESIGN-BASIS ACCIDENTS AT PRESSURIZED-WATER REACTORS (TAC NO. MC4701)
Dear Mr. Harden:
On September 13, 2004, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors, as part of the NRCs efforts to assess the likelihood that the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) and containment spray system (CSS) pumps at domestic pressurized water reactors (PWRs) would experience a debris-induced loss of net positive suction head margin during sump recirculation. The NRC issued this GL to all PWR licensees to request that addressees (1) perform a mechanistic evaluation using an NRC-approved methodology of the potential for the adverse effects of post-accident debris blockage and operation with debris-laden fluids to impede or prevent the recirculation functions of the ECCS and CSS following all postulated accidents for which the recirculation of these systems is required, and (2) implement any plant modifications that the above evaluation identifies as being necessary to ensure system functionality. Addressees were also required to submit information specified in GL 2004-02 to the NRC in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations Section 50.54(f). Additionally, in the GL, the NRC established a schedule for the submittal of the written responses and the completion of any corrective actions identified while complying with the requests in the GL.
By letter dated March 7, 2005, supplemented by letters dated July 11, and August 25, 2005, Nuclear Management Company, LLC provided a response to the GL. The NRC staff is reviewing and evaluating your response along with the responses from all PWR licensees. The NRC staff has determined that responses to the questions in the enclosure to this letter are necessary in order for the staff to complete its review. Please note that the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Division of Component Integrity is still conducting its initial reviews with respect to coatings. Although some initial coatings questions are included in the enclosure to this letter, the NRC might issue an additional request for information regarding coatings issues in the near future.
P. Harden Please provide your response within 60 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1423.
Sincerely,
/RA/
L. Mark Padovan, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch III-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-255
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/encl: see next page
ML060370533 *per e-mail OFFICE LPL3-1/PM LPL3-1/LA DSS/SSIB DCI/CSGB LPL3-1/BC (A)
NAME MPadovan THarris DSolorio* EMurphy* TKobetz DATE 2/9/06 2/9/06 2/6/06 2/8/06 2/9/06 Palisades Plant cc:
Robert A. Fenech, Senior Vice President Michigan Department of Attorney General Nuclear, Fossil, and Hydro Operations Special Litigation Division Consumers Energy Company 525 West Ottawa St.
1945 Parnall Rd. Sixth Floor, G. Mennen Williams Building Jackson, MI 49201 Lansing, MI 48913 Michael B. Sellman Arunas T. Udrys, Esquire President and Chief Executive Officer Consumers Energy Company Nuclear Management Company, LLC 1 Energy Plaza 700 First Street Jackson, MI 49201 Hudson, MI 54016 Jonathan Rogoff, Esquire Regional Administrator, Region III Vice President, Counsel & Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Management Company, LLC Suite 210 700 First Street 2443 Warrenville Road Hudson, WI 54016 Lisle, IL 60532-4351 Douglas E. Cooper Supervisor Senior Vice President - Group Operations Covert Township Palisades Nuclear Plant P. O. Box 35 Nuclear Management Company, LLC Covert, MI 49043 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043 Office of the Governor P. O. Box 30013 Lansing, MI 48909 Stephen T. Wawro, Director of Nuclear Assets U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Consumers Energy Company Resident Inspector's Office Palisades Nuclear Plant Palisades Plant 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway 27782 Blue Star Memorial Highway Covert, MI 49043 Covert, MI 49043 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Laurie A. Lahti, Manager Waste and Hazardous Materials Division Regulatory Affairs Hazardous Waste and Radiological Nuclear Management Company, LLC Protection Section Palisades Nuclear Plant Nuclear Facilities Unit 27780 Blue Star Memorial Highway Constitution Hall, Lower-Level North Covert, MI 49043 525 West Allegan Street P.O. Box 30241 Lansing, MI 48909-7741 November 2005
GL 2004-02 RAI Questions Plant Materials
- 1. (Not applicable).
- 2. Identify the amounts (i.e., surface area) of the following materials that are:
(a) submerged in the containment pool following a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA),
(b) in the containment spray zone following a LOCA:
- aluminum
- zinc (from galvanized steel and from inorganic zinc coatings)
- copper
- carbon steel not coated
- uncoated concrete Compare the amounts of these materials in the submerged and spray zones at your plant relative to the scaled amounts of these materials used in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) nuclear industry jointly-sponsored Integrated Chemical Effects Tests (ICET) (e.g., 5x the amount of uncoated carbon steel assumed for the ICETs).
- 3. Identify the amount (surface area) and material (e.g., aluminum) for any scaffolding stored in containment. Indicate the amount, if any, that would be submerged in the containment pool following a LOCA. Clarify if scaffolding material was included in the response to Question 2.
- 4. Provide the type and amount of any metallic paints or non-stainless steel insulation jacketing (not included in the response to Question 2) that would be either submerged or subjected to containment spray.
Containment Pool Chemistry
- 5. Provide the expected containment pool pH during the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) recirculation mission time following a LOCA at the beginning of the fuel cycle and at the end of the fuel cycle. Identify any key assumptions.
- 6. For the ICET environment that is the most similar to your plant conditions, compare the expected containment pool conditions to the ICET conditions for the following items:
boron concentration, buffering agent concentration, and pH. Identify any other significant differences between the ICET environment and the expected plant-specific environment.
- 7. (Not applicable).
ENCLOSURE
Plant-Specific Chemical Effects
- 8. Discuss your overall strategy to evaluate potential chemical effects including demonstrating that, with chemical effects considered, there is sufficient net positive suction head (NPSH) margin available during the ECCS mission time. Provide an estimated date with milestones for the completion of all chemical effects evaluations.
- 9. Identify, if applicable, any plans to remove certain materials from the containment building and/or to make a change from the existing chemicals that buffer containment pool pH following a LOCA.
- 10. If bench-top testing is being used to inform plant specific head loss testing, indicate how the bench-top test parameters (e.g., buffering agent concentrations, pH, materials, etc.)
compare to your plant conditions. Describe your plans for addressing uncertainties related to head loss from chemical effects including, but not limited to, use of chemical surrogates, scaling of sample size and test durations. Discuss how it will be determined that allowances made for chemical effects are conservative.
Plant Environment Specific
- 11. Provide a detailed description of any testing that has been or will be performed as part of a plant-specific chemical effects assessment. Identify the vendor, if applicable, that will be performing the testing. Identify the environment (e.g., borated water at pH 9, deionized water, tap water) and test temperature for any plant-specific head loss or transport tests. Discuss how any differences between these test environments and your plant containment pool conditions could affect the behavior of chemical surrogates.
Discuss the criteria that will be used to demonstrate that chemical surrogates produced for testing (e.g., head loss, flume) behave in a similar manner physically and chemically as in the ICET environment and plant containment pool environment.
- 12. For your plant-specific environment, provide the maximum projected head loss resulting from chemical effects (a) within the first day following a LOCA, and (b) during the entire ECCS recirculation mission time. If the response to this question will be based on testing that is either planned or in progress, provide an estimated date for providing this information to the NRC.
ICET 1 and ICET 5 Plants
- 13. (Not applicable).
Trisodium Phosphate (TSP) Plants
- 14. Given the results from the ICET #3 tests (Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML053040533) and NRC-sponsored head loss tests (Information Notice 2005-26 and Supplement 1), estimate the concentration of dissolved calcium that would exist in your containment pool from all containment sources (e.g., concrete and materials such as calcium silicate, Marinite',
mineral wool, kaylo) following a large-break LOCA and discuss any ramifications related to the evaluation of chemical effects and downstream effects.
- 15. (Not applicable).
- 16. Given an active strainer design, discuss your evaluation of potential downstream effects resulting from chemical products that pass through the active strainer into the ECCS system.
Additional Chemical Effects Questions
- 17. (Not applicable).
- 18. (Not applicable).
- 19. (Not applicable).
- 20. (Not applicable).
- 21. (Not applicable).
- 22. (Not applicable).
- 23. (Not applicable).
- 24. (Not applicable).
Coatings Generic - All Plants
- 25. Describe how your coatings assessment was used to identify degraded qualified/acceptable coatings and determine the amount of debris that will result from these coatings. This should include how the assessment technique(s) demonstrates that qualified/acceptable coatings remain in compliance with plant licensing requirements for design basis accident (DBA) performance. If current examination techniques cannot demonstrate the coatings ability to meet plant licensing requirements for DBA performance, licensees should describe an augmented testing and inspection program that provides assurance that the qualified/acceptable coatings continue to meet DBA performance requirements. Alternately, assume all containment coatings fail and describe the potential for this debris to transport to the sump.
Plant Specific
- 26. (Not applicable).
- 27. (Not applicable).
- 28. (Not applicable).
- 29. (Not applicable).
- 30. (Not applicable).
- 31. You indicated that you would be evaluating downstream effects in accordance with WCAP 16406-P. The NRC is currently involved in discussions with the Westinghouse Owner's Group (WOG) to address questions/concerns regarding this WCAP on a generic basis, and some of these discussions may resolve issues related to your particular station. The following issues have the potential for generic resolution; however, if a generic resolution cannot be obtained, plant-specific resolution will be required. As such, formal RAIs will not be issued on these topics at this time, but may be needed in the future. It is expected that your final evaluation response will specifically address those portions of the WCAP used, their applicability, and exceptions taken to the WCAP. For your information, topics under ongoing discussion include:
- a. Wear rates of pump-wetted materials and the effect of wear on component operation
- b. Settling of debris in low flow areas downstream of the strainer or credit for filtering leading to a change in fluid composition
- c. Volume of debris injected into the reactor vessel and core region
- d. Debris types and properties
- e. Contribution of in-vessel velocity profile to the formation of a debris bed or clog
- f. Fluid and metal component temperature impact
- g. Gravitational and temperature gradients
- h. Debris and boron precipitation effects
- i. ECCS injection paths
- j. Core bypass design features
- k. Radiation and chemical considerations
- l. Debris adhesion to solid surfaces
- m. Thermodynamic properties of coolant
- 32. An active strainer effectively reduces all debris that reaches the active screen into fine fibers and small particulates, then passes them on through the screen into the reactor vessel. Therefore, all the topics highlighted above must also include an evaluation for long-term erosion/degradation of all debris that is postulated to reach the active screen
- 33. The NRC staffs SE discusses a systematic approach to the break selection process where an initial break location is selected at a convenient location (such as the terminal end of the piping) and break locations would be evaluated at 5-foot intervals in order to evaluate all break locations. For each break location, all phases of the accident scenario are evaluated. It is not clear that you have applied such an approach. Please discuss how the limiting break locations listed as being evaluated in your GL response were selected.
- 34. Were secondary side breaks (e.g., main steam, feedwater) considered in the break
selection analyses? Would these breaks rely on ECCS sump recirculation?
- 35. The staff SE refers to Regulatory Guide 1.82 which lists considerations for determining the limiting break location (staff position 1.3.2.3). Please discuss how these considerations were evaluated as part of the Palisades break selection analyses.
- 36. The licensees GL response provides an illustration showing the analyzed break locations. The sump is shown in the pressure relief valve compartment. Please discuss the basis for not evaluating a break in this compartment, as a break in this compartment seems likely to have the most direct path to the sump.
- 37. The licensee includes an analyzed break called alternate break. Is this break analyzed in accordance with the Alternate Methodology (Section 6) of the NRC staffs SE? It is not clear from the GL response how the alternate approach is being applied. Please provide a detailed discussion of how the SE Section 6 methodology is being applied.
- 38. The licensee did not provide information on the details of the break selection, zone of influence and debris characteristics evaluations other than to state that the Nuclear Energy Institute and SE methodologies were applied. Please provide a description of the methodology applied in these evaluations and include a discussion of the technical justification for deviations from the SE-approved methodology.
- 39. How much passive strainer area will be available to complement the active strainer?
Describe the passive portion of the strainer. Also, describe whether/how this area was or will be credited during plant-specific testing.
- 40. What specific sources of hold-up are accounted for in the containment minimum water level calculation?
- 41. Is it possible for large pieces of insulation or other large pieces of latent or foreign material debris to be transported to the active strainers (e.g., via blowdown from the break, sheeting flows that might occur during the initial phase of an accident, or floatation)? If so, are the active strainers protected from large pieces of debris, for example, with trash racks or other interceptors? If protection does not exist, then to what extent are the strainers capable of withstanding large pieces of debris, and to what extent has this capability been demonstrated by testing?
- 42. What is the minimum submergence depth for the active strainers? Describe the testing and analysis that has been performed to demonstrate that large pieces of debris and/or high concentrations of debris at the strainer surface would not prevent the entry of water into the strainer under shallow submergence conditions.
- 43. Please explain the derivation of the maximum concentration of debris that will arrive at the active strainer and justify that the analyzed maximum concentration is conservative.
How much margin exists between the analyzed maximum concentration and the estimated point of failure of the active strainer?
- 44. How much margin (i.e., water volume) is available between the maximum containment
water level and the level at which the active strainer motors would become flooded?
- 45. Are there any vents or other penetrations through the active or passive strainer control surfaces which connect the volume internal to the strainer to the containment atmosphere above the containment minimum water level? In this case, dependent upon the containment pool height and strainer and sump geometries, the presence of the vent line or penetration could prevent a water seal over the entire strainer surface from ever forming; or else this seal could be lost once the head loss across the debris bed exceeds a certain criterion, such as the submergence depth of the vent line or penetration. According to Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 1.82, Revision 3, without a water seal across the entire strainer surface, the strainer should not be considered to be fully submerged. Therefore, if applicable, explain what sump strainer failure criteria are being applied for the vented sump scenario described above.
- 46. What is the basis for concluding that the refueling cavity drain(s) would not become blocked with debris? What are the potential types and characteristics of debris that could reach these drains? In particular, could large pieces of debris be blown into the upper containment by pipe breaks occurring in the lower containment, and subsequently drop into the cavity? In the case that large pieces of debris could reach the cavity, are trash racks or interceptors present to prevent drain blockage? In the case that partial/total blockage of the drains might occur, do water hold-up calculations used in the computation of NPSH margin account for the lost or held-up water resulting from debris blockage?
- 47. Has debris settling upstream of the sump strainer (i.e., the near-field effect) been credited or will it be credited in testing used to support the sizing or analytical design basis of the proposed replacement strainers? In the case that settling was credited for any of these purposes, estimate the fraction of debris that settled and describe the analyses that were performed to correlate the scaled flow conditions and any surrogate debris in the test flume with the actual flow conditions and debris types in the plants containment pool.